Last week, we asked the so-called “Gang of 500” to spend the last days before Tuesday's midterm elections focusing on things that matter rather than focusing on campaign tactics and false and trivial non-issues raised by candidates and operatives desperate to distract the public.

Media treat us to breathtakingly stupid feeding-frenzy over transparent GOP efforts to trick people into thinking John Kerry insulted the military and John Kerry is the Democratic Party

Last week, we asked the so-called “Gang of 500” to spend the last days before Tuesday's midterm elections focusing on things that matter rather than focusing on campaign tactics and false and trivial non-issues raised by candidates and operatives desperate to distract the public.

We knew our plea was likely to fall on deaf ears, that the reporters and pundits who make up The Gang are no more likely to spend the final days of an election season talking about issues and policy than they are to sprout wings and fly. A Gang whose leaders openly declare that “Matt Drudge rules our world” is unlikely to give us much in the way of meaningful news; indeed, we're lucky they don't lead the evening news with stories of three-headed cows.

Sure enough, right on cue, they treated us to a breathtakingly stupid, multi-day feeding frenzy over transparent Republican efforts to trick people into thinking that Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) -- who volunteered for service in Vietnam at a time when many current Republican leaders "had other priorities" -- insulted the military.

Kerry, of course, had done no such thing -- he had criticized President Bush, not exactly an uncommon act these days. So obvious was the target of Kerry's comments that even Matthew Dowd, who served as Bush's chief campaign strategist, and former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX), acknowledged that Kerry was not insulting members of the military.

But Republicans less honest (or more desperate) than Dowd and Armey immediately launched their bogus attack on Kerry. Drudge stoked the fires, and the nation's political media spent the better part of three days pretending that Kerry's comments were the most important news of the day rather than the least. (Though the din has died down somewhat, as of this writing, Wolf Blitzer, among others, was still reporting about the Kerry flap.)

It is no surprise, then, that a Democracy Corps poll (PDF) found that “the story clearly broke through -- over 20 percent of respondents in an open-ended question on what is happening in the campaign mentioned him.” But it may come as a surprise to the members of the Gang of 500 that their cliquish ridicule of one of their favorite punching bags hasn't had an effect on voters' preferences. Democracy Corps found that the controversy “has not helped Republicans,” and that “independents show no interest in it.” The kicker? The Democracy Corps poll was conducted in 50 congressional districts currently held by Republicans.

If actual voters don't agree with the Washington, D.C., political journalists and pundits that the most pressing issue of our time is a joke John Kerry told about George Bush, what do they care about?

Believe it or not, they care about Iraq, about the economy, about health care, about Social Security, about terrorism, and about energy policy. They care about things that affect their lives, despite the political media's strenuous efforts to make them care about “Freak Show” political stunts instead.

That's why we asked The Gang -- begged them, really -- to take their jobs seriously, to take the voters seriously, to take the candidates seriously. Just for 10 days.

They wouldn't do it. They wouldn't focus on what really matters: the substantive differences between candidates, between parties, between ideologies.

As Media Matters for America has noted (and corrected) repeatedly, one of the basic storylines the political media have peddled for longer than we care to remember is that Democrats lack a positive agenda. MSNBC's Chris Matthews, for example, recently belittled Democrats by saying of the party, “Do you know what the difference is between a grown-up and a kid? You got to sit in the front seat and drive the car.” Back in April, CNN's Blitzer asked Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean, “Why are you, the Democrats, having such a hard -- tough time convincing Americans that you do have a set of policies for the country?” We wrote at the time:

Regrettably, Dean didn't answer, “Because of you, Wolf. Because we do have policies, and we do everything we can to draw attention to them, but you ignore it. Because on March 29, Democrats unveiled our new national security agenda -- and you, Wolf, you and your network virtually ignored it. You showed two minutes of House Democratic Leader Harry Reid speaking at the press conference -- and nearly two hours of President Bush speaking. We have a hard time 'convincing Americans' that we have 'a set of policies' because you, Wolf, ignore those policies -- then assert that we don't have any."

Later, Blitzer teased a replay of the interview by declaring: “Plus, Democratic Party chairman Howard Dean. He's also in The Situation Room. With the Republicans facing so much trouble, why does it seem that Democrats can't get their act together? I'll ask him.”

Why does it seem that Democrats can't get their act together? The same reason that Democrats have a “tough time convincing Americans” that they have a “set of policies” -- because of Wolf Blitzer and his colleagues. A new AP-Ipsos poll finds that:

By a 49-33 margin, the public favors Democrats over Republicans when asked which party should control Congress.

That 16-point Democratic advantage is the largest the party has enjoyed in AP-Ipsos polling.

How much more does Blitzer think Democrats can get their act together? If they open up a 20-point lead, will he finally conclude that they have their act together? How about 25 points? Thirty?

The Democrats did open up a 20-point lead in the generic ballot; recent polls put their lead between 11 and 19 points. But Blitzer and his colleagues still can't bring themselves to report that the Democrats have gotten “their act together.” CNN's Candy Crowley, for example, recently declared that if Democrats win control of Congress, “it will be through no fault their own.”

So when CNN's Lou Dobbs introduced a November 1 segment by congressional correspondent Andrea Koppel by promising some “estimates as to what the House and Senate would look like, should the Democrats win majorities in both houses,” we had some hope that perhaps CNN would finally tell us, clearly, simply, and without snide editorializing, what the basic differences are between the candidates and leaders of the two major political parties.

That hope was quickly dashed.

Instead of a straightforward report about what Democrats want to do, Koppel offered the Republican version of what Democrats want to do, complete with repeated use of the label “liberal.” Koppel began:

KOPPEL: They're among the most liberal politicians in America: Nancy Pelosi, Alcee Hastings, John Conyers, Henry Waxman and Charlie Rangel. And if Democrats win back the House next week, they're set to rocket to the top positions in Congress. Republicans have seized on the prospect of liberal lawmakers running the House as a way to fire up their base on the campaign trail. The president singled out New York's Charlie Rangel, though not by name.

Koppel then made clear that her focus was not what Democrats would do, but rather what Republicans say Democrats would do by playing a clip of President Bush attacking Democrats over taxes ... then a clip of a Republican candidate's radio ad attacking Democrats ... then (finally) a clip of House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (CA) responding to the attacks ... then a clip of (yet another) Republican, who according to Koppel “doesn't buy” Pelosi's statement.

Finally, Koppel shifted away from Republican tax attacks ... and turned to Republican attacks on Reps. Hastings (D-FL) and Conyers (D-MI). Never once, in the entire segment -- billed as a look at “what the House and Senate would look like” if Democrats win -- did Koppel tell viewers what Democrats want to do. She did, however, conclude by announcing that, while some Republicans “have more moderate voting records,” the Democrats in line to be committee chairs “are all extremely to the left of their party.”

Koppel didn't say a word about what Democrats want to do; the whole segment was a simple recitation of GOP spin. She repeatedly asserted that the potential Democratic leaders are liberal, even “extremely to the left,” but offered not a single, solitary word to back up the label.

That isn't reporting; that isn't news. That's acting as a shill for the Republican Party.

Since Koppel and so many of her D.C. political journalism peers seem to want to keep it a secret, here's a quick look at a few things that many Democrats say they want to do:

• Raise the minimum wage for the first time since 1997. The current federal minimum wage of $5.15 an hour means that a person working five days a week, 52 weeks a year would earn a mere $10,712 a year. Republicans have refused to raise the minimum wage without including massive tax breaks for the rich. According to a recent Gallup poll (subscription required), 86 percent of Americans would approve of such an increase of the minimum wage.
• Extend health coverage to the uninsured: Gallup found that 79 percent would approve of such legislation.
• Allow the purchase of imported prescription drugs, which are often cheaper: According to Gallup, 72 percent of Americans would approve.
• Implement the recommendations of the 9-11 Commission: According to Gallup, 62 percent of Americans would approve.

And that doesn't even include such basics as pushing for a renewed focus on finding and capturing or killing Osama bin Laden and forcing a desperately needed change of course in Iraq policy. (Gallup found that 63 percent of Americans now favor a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.)

So, while political reporters like Koppel insist that Congress, under Democratic control, would be a hotbed of wild-eyed liberalism far out of touch with the American people, the reality is that the Democratic agenda enjoys massive public support.

As a further measure of that support, Newsweek recently conducted a poll in which it asked which party voters “trust to do a better job” handling a variety of issues. Democrats enjoyed double-digit leads on health care, stem cell research, gas and oil prices, federal spending and the deficit, Iraq, and the economy. They also had leads outside the margin of error on immigration, abortion, and same-sex marriage, and small leads on crime and guns. The parties were tied on moral values, and Republicans had a one-point edge on the issue of the “war against terrorism at home and abroad.” That Newsweek poll was no outlier: a USA Today/Gallup poll conducted in October found Democrats with at least a 20-point lead on health care, gas prices, government corruption, the economy, and Iraq, and leads of five or more points on immigration, moral standards, and terrorism.

That's the reality of what Democrats say they'll do, and what the public thinks of it. While Koppel paints a picture of out-of-touch liberals, the American people support the Democrats' agenda. While Candy Crowley insists that Democrats won't deserve credit for any victories they may enjoy next week, polls consistently contradict her.

The Gang of 500 won't tell you any of this, though. They'll just sneer at John Kerry, repeat bogus GOP spin about Nancy Pelosi, and occasionally toss around empty pejorative phrases like “extremely to the left,” as though that counts as a substantive analysis of issues and proposals.

It doesn't. You deserve better. So don't base your decisions on what the media tells you. Look into the candidates and parties for yourself.

Jamison Foser is Executive Vice President at Media Matters for America.